World Scientific
  • Search
  •   
Skip main navigation

Cookies Notification

We use cookies on this site to enhance your user experience. By continuing to browse the site, you consent to the use of our cookies. Learn More
×
Our website is made possible by displaying certain online content using javascript.
In order to view the full content, please disable your ad blocker or whitelist our website www.worldscientific.com.

System Upgrade on Tue, Oct 25th, 2022 at 2am (EDT)

Existing users will be able to log into the site and access content. However, E-commerce and registration of new users may not be available for up to 12 hours.
For online purchase, please visit us again. Contact us at [email protected] for any enquiries.

A MODEL OF DYNAMIC REWIRING AND KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE IN R&D NETWORKS

    https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219525916500041Cited by:13 (Source: Crossref)

    This paper investigates the process of knowledge exchange in inter-firm Research and Development (R&D) alliances by means of an agent-based model. Extant research has pointed out that firms select alliance partners considering both network-related and network-unrelated features (e.g., social capital versus complementary knowledge stocks). In our agent-based model, firms are located in a metric knowledge space. The interaction rules incorporate an exploration phase and a knowledge transfer phase, during which firms search for a new partner and then evaluate whether they can establish an alliance to exchange their knowledge stocks. The model parameters determining the overall system properties are the rate at which alliances form and dissolve and the agents’ interaction radius. Next, we define a novel indicator of performance, based on the distance traveled by the firms in the knowledge space. Remarkably, we find that — depending on the alliance formation rate and the interaction radius — firms tend to cluster around one or more attractors in the knowledge space, whose position is an emergent property of the system. And, more importantly, we find that there exists an inverted U-shaped dependence of the network performance on both model parameters.

    References

    • 1. Ahuja, G., Collaboration networks, structural holes, and innovation: A longitudinal study, Adm. Sci. Q. 45 (2000) 425–455. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 2. Ahuja, G., The duality of collaboration: Inducements and opportunities in the formation of interfirm linkages, Strateg. Manage. J. 21 (2000) 317–343. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 3. Axelrod, R., The dissemination of culture, J. Conflict Resolution 41 (1997) 203–226. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 4. Baum, J., Cowan, R. and Jonard, N., Network-independent partner selection and the evolution of innovation networks, Manage. Sci. 56 (2010) 2094–2110. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 5. Baum, J. A., Calabrese, T. and Silverman, B. S., Don’t go it alone: Alliance network composition and startups’ performance in Canadian biotechnology, Strateg. Manage. J. 21 (2000) 267–294. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 6. Cohen, W. and Levinthal, D., Absorptive capacity: A new perspective on learning and innovation, Adm. Sci. Q. 35 (1990) 128–152. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 7. Cohen, W. M. and Levinthal, D. A., Innovation and learning: The two faces of R&D, Econ. J. 99 (1989) 569–596. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 8. Cowan, R., Jonard, N. and Zimmermann, J., Bilateral collaboration and the emergence of innovation networks, Manage. Sci. 53 (2007) 1051–1067. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 9. Das, T. and Teng, B., A resource-based theory of strategic alliances, J. Manage. 26 (2000) 31. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 10. Deffuant, G., Neau, D., Amblard, F. and Weisbuch, G., Mixing beliefs among interacting agents, Adv. Complex Syst. 3 (2000) 87–98. LinkGoogle Scholar
    • 11. DeGroot, M. H., Reaching a consensus, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 69 (1974) 118–121. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 12. Fagiolo, G. and Dosi, G., Exploitation, exploration and innovation in a model of endogenous growth with locally interacting agents, Struct. Change Econ. Dyn. 14 (2003) 237–273. Google Scholar
    • 13. Fischer, M. M. and Fröhlich, J., Knowledge, Complexity and Innovation Systems (Springer Science & Business Media, 2001). Google Scholar
    • 14. Garas, A., Tomasello, M. V. and Schweitzer, F., Selection rules in alliance formation: Strategic decisions or abundance of choice? arXiv:1403.3298. Google Scholar
    • 15. Gersbach, H. and Schmutzler, A., Endogenous spillovers and incentives to innovate, Econ. Theory 21 (2003) 59–79. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 16. Gilbert, N., Agent-based social simulation: dealing with complexity, Technical Report, Center for Research on Social Simulation, University of Surrey, Guildford, UK (2004). Google Scholar
    • 17. Gomes-Casseres, B., Hagedoorn, J. and Jaffe, A., Do alliances promote knowledge flows? J. Financ. Econ. 80 (2006) 5–33. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 18. Grant, R. and Baden-Fuller, C., A knowledge accessing theory of strategic alliances, J. Manage. Stud. 41 (2004) 61–84. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 19. Groeber, P., Schweitzer, F. and Press, K., How groups can foster consensus: The case of local cultures, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 12 (2009) 4. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 20. Gulati, R., Sytch, M. and Tatarynowicz, A., The rise and fall of small worlds: Exploring the dynamics of social structure, Organ. Sci. 23 (2012) 449–471. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 21. Hagedoorn, J., Inter-firm R&D partnerships: An overview of major trends and patterns since 1960, Res. Policy 31 (2002) 477–492. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 22. Hagedoorn, J., Link, A. N. and Vonortas, N. S., Research partnerships, Res. Policy 29 (2000) 567–586. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 23. Hanaki, N., Nakajima, R. and Ogura, Y., The dynamics of R&D network in the IT industry, Res. Policy 39 (2010) 386–399. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 24. Hegselmann, R. and Krause, U., Opinion dynamics and bounded confidence: Models, analysis and simulation, J. Artif. Soc. Soc. Simul. 5 (2002). ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 25. König, M. D., Battiston, S., Napoletano, M. and Schweitzer, F., The efficiency and stability of R&D networks, Games Econ. Behav. 75 (2012) 694–713. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 26. König, M. D. and Tessone, C. J., Network evolution based on centrality, Phys. Rev. E 84 (2011) 056108. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 27. König, M. D., Tessone, C. J. and Zenou, Y., Nestedness in networks: A theoretical model and some applications, Theor. Econ. 9 (2014) 695–752. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 28. Lane, P. J. and Lubatkin, M., Relative absorptive capacity and interorganizational learning, Strat. Manag. J. 19 (1998) 461–477. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 29. Liebeskind, J. P., Knowledge, strategy, and the theory of the firm, Strat. Manag. J. 17 (1996) 93–109. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 30. Mowery, D., Oxley, J. and Silverman, B., Technological overlap and interfirm cooperation: Implications for the resource-based view of the firm, Res. Policy 27 (1998) 507–523. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 31. Nelson, R. R. and Winter, S. G., An Evolutionary Theory of Economic Change (Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, 1982). Google Scholar
    • 32. Owen-Smith, J. and Powell, W. W., Knowledge networks as channels and conduits: The effects of spillovers in the Boston biotechnology community, Organ. Sci. 15 (2004) 5–21. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 33. Powell, W., White, D., Koput, K. and Owen-Smith, J., Network dynamics and field evolution: The growth of interorganizational collaboration in the life sciences, Am. J. Sociol. 110 (2005) 1132–1205. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 34. Pyka, A. and Fagiolo, G., Agent-based modelling: A methodology for neo-Schum-peterian economics, in Elgar Companion to Neo-Schumpeterian Economics (Edward Elgar Publishing, 2007). Google Scholar
    • 35. Rosenkopf, L. and Almeida, P., Overcoming local search through alliances and mobility, Manage. Sci. 49 (2003) 751–766. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 36. Rosenkopf, L. and Schilling, M., Comparing alliance network structure across industries: Observations and explanations, Strat. Entrep. J. 1 (2007) 191–209. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 37. Sampson, R. C., R&D alliances and firm performance: The impact of technological diversity and alliance organization on innovation, Acad. Manage. J. 50 (2007) 364–386. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 38. Schweitzer, F. and Behera, L., Nonlinear voter models: The transition from invasion to coexistence, Eur. Phys. J. B-Condens. Matter Complex Syst. 67 (2009) 301–318. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 39. Suzumura, K., Cooperative and noncooperative R&D in an oligopoly with spillovers, Am. Econ. Rev. 82 (1992) 1307–1320. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 40. Tessone, C. J. and Zanette, D. H., Synchronised firing induced by network dynamics in excitable systems, Europhys. Lett. 99 (2012) 68006. Google Scholar
    • 41. Tomasello, M. V., Napoletano, M., Garas, A. and Schweitzer, F., The rise and fall of R&D networks, arXiv:1304.3623. Google Scholar
    • 42. Tomasello, M. V., Perra, N., Tessone, C. J., Karsai, M. and Schweitzer, F., The role of endogenous and exogenous mechanisms in the formation of R&D networks, Sci. Rep. 4 (2014) 5679. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 43. Tomasello, M. V., Tessone, C. J. and Schweitzer, F., The effect of R&D collaborations on firms’ technological positions, International Forum on Knowledge Asset Dynamics (IFKAD) 2015 Proceedings (2015) 260–276. Google Scholar
    • 44. Vazquez, F. and Zanette, D., Epidemics and chaotic synchronization in recombining monogamous populations, Physica D: Nonlinear Phenomena 239 (2010) 1922–1928. ISIGoogle Scholar
    • 45. Winter, S. G., Schumpeterian competition in alternative technological regimes, J. Econ. Behav. Organ. 5 (1984) 287–320. ISIGoogle Scholar
    Remember to check out the Most Cited Articles!

    Check out our titles in Complex Systems today!